Duplicated WASM `unreachable` instructions

[Expyron]

Targets: wasm32-unknown-unknown, wasm32-wasi

When calling core::arch::wasm32::unreachable(), the generated WASM contains two unreachable instructions instead of only one.

Example:

pub fn main(){
    core::arch::wasm32::unreachable();
}

Output (from Godbolt):

example::main:
        unreachable
        unreachable
        end_function

Godbolt link: https://rust.godbolt.org/z/Yqz6Kh9eq

This is mostly noticeable when using build-std-features=panic_immediate_abort (which I know is unstable), as all instances of panic!() are basically replaced with unreachable(), and then compile down to two unreachable instructions.

This behavior appears to have been present since core::arch::wasm32::unreachable() was made available, so this is not a regression.

[Rageking8]

@rustbot label +A-codegen +O-wasm

[Noratrieb]

This isn't just a WASM thing but a general codegen thing where LLVM still inserts the TrapUnreachable trap after a call to llvm.trap. See this https://godbolt.org/z/a7Wv58EPo for a simpler example.

[Noratrieb]

@rustbot label -O-wasm +A-llvm

[majaha]

I'm having a look into this.

The x86 and Wasm examples may not be entirely related, as llc targeting x86 doesn't exhibit this bug: https://godbolt.org/z/qcqhYbqz5

Even going back to older llc versions in Godbolt doesn't reproduce the bug, so I assume for the x86 case it's either a bug in rustc's llvm fork, or an issue with the way rustc is using llvm.

[majaha]

I've identified a suspicious unstable rustc option -Z trap-unreachable=false which makes the x86 example work as expected, but not the Wasm version: https://godbolt.org/z/7ja4nY77e This probably accounts for the difference I was seeing with llc.

Another function of interest is std::hint::unreachable_unchecked: https://godbolt.org/z/5d4sEePb7

Among the various parties (rustc, llvm, wasm), there are different understandings of what "unreachable" means. I wonder if this is contributing to the problems.

[majaha]

I also found this related llvm issue: https://reviews.llvm.org/D66980

[majaha]

It turns out LLVM has a NoTrapAfterNoreturn to complement the TrapUnreachable option. Making rustc use that option fixes the x86 case.

I found this issue: #88826 about turning TrapUnreachable off by default. @nikic do you think it's safe to turn TrapUnreachable off yet? If not, would a pull request enabling NoTrapAfterNoReturn be welcome?

I still have yet to investigate the Wasm case more thoroughly.

[nikic]

@majaha I'd suggest filing an MCP (https://forge.rust-lang.org/compiler/mcp.html) for enabling NoTrapAfterNoReturn. I think doing this is fine, but other people may have concerns.